86

6 R. V. Malinovskii — deputy to the Fourth State Duma from the workers' electoral curia of Moscow Province, member of the Bolshevik faction of the Duma. Later exposed as a provocateur, secret agent of the tsarist secret police. In 1918 was tried and executed by sentence of the Supreme Tribunal of the All-Russian Central Executive Committee (see V. I. Lenin. Complete Collected Works, vol. 32, pp. 222, 353; vol. 41, pp. 28–29).

2992

OUTLINE OF A PLAN AND MATERIALS 
FOR A WORK ON R. LUXEMBURG'S BOOK 
*THE ACCUMULATION OF CAPITAL*1

[March 1913]

An Unsuccessful Supplement to Marx's Theory 
by Rosa Luxemburg

(p. 322)2

Approximately:

I. Fourteen years ago. Populists vs* Marxists. Legal Marxists and Social-Democrats3.

II. Distortion in Rosa Luxemburg.

III. Posing of the theoretical problem.

IV. Rosa Luxemburg's Criticism4. Anticriticism.

V. Rosa Luxemburg's "Supplement." Failure.

V bis. German Social-Democratic press and "squabbling"5.

VI. Dialectics and Eclecticism.

VII. Imperialism and the realization of Mehrwert (Rothstein etc.)6.

TRANSLATION

Approximately:

I. Fourteen years ago. Populists vs* Marxists. Legal Marxists and Social-Democrats3.

II. Distortion in Rosa Luxemburg.

III. Posing of the theoretical problem.

IV. Criticism by Rosa Luxemburg4. Anticriticism.

V. Rosa Luxemburg's "Supplement." Unsuccessful attempt.

* — versus — against.

V bis. German Social-Democratic press and "squabbling"5.

VI. Dialectics and Eclecticism.

VII. Imperialism and the realization of surplus value (Rothstein, etc.)6.

1 The plan of a work concerning R. Luxemburg's book *The Accumulation of Capital* (R. Luxemburg. "Die Akkumulation des Kapitals". Berlin, 1913) was apparently drawn up in March 1913. In January V. I. Lenin wrote to A. Pannekoek in connection with his review of R. Luxemburg's book, published in the "Bremer Burger-Zeitung": "I am very glad that on the main point you arrive at the same conclusion to which I came fourteen years ago in my polemic with Tugan-Baranovsky and the 'Volkstumler' ('Populists'. — Ed.), namely, that the realization of surplus value is possible even in a 'pure capitalist' society. I have not yet seen R. Luxemburg's book, but theoretically you are completely correct on this point... Luxemburg's 'dialectics' seems to me to be... eclecticism" (see Complete Collected Works, vol. 48, pp. 148–149). No later than the end of March V. I. Lenin had already read R. Luxemburg's book. "I read Rosa's new book 'Die Akkumulation des Kapitals,'" he wrote at that time to Kamenev. "She lied outrageously! Distorted Marx. I am very glad that both Pannekoek and Eckstein and O. Bauer condemned her unanimously and said against her what I said against the Populists in 1899. I intend to write about Rosa in 'Prosveshchenie' for no. 4" (ibid., p. 173). Judging by the placement (on the back of the sheet with the outline of a plan of articles for the thirtieth anniversary of K. Marx's death), the plan of the work on R. Luxemburg's book was drawn up after February 21.

While reading R. Luxemburg's book, V. I. Lenin made notes on separate sheets, which together with the outline of the plan were published in 1933 in Lenin Miscellany XXII, pp. 337–390. Organically connected with the outline of the plan are the tables compiled by V. I. Lenin illustrating the change in the structure of the aggregate social product (published below), and his analysis of the diagram of expanded reproduction provided by K. Marx in *Capital*, vol. II, ch. XXI (reproduced as an illustration).

2 On page 322 of her book, R. Luxemburg writes about the necessity to "supplement" Marx's theory (see Lenin Miscellany XXII, p. 377).

3 V. I. Lenin has in mind his struggle against the Populists and Legal Marxists on the problems of market theory, the realization of surplus value under capitalism. This struggle, which he conducted over a number of years (see his works "On the So-Called Question of Markets," 1893, "On the Characterization of Economic Romanticism," 1897, "A Note on the Question of Market Theory" and "More on the Question of the Theory of Realization," both articles published in 1899), found its completion in his book *The Development of Capitalism in Russia*, published in 1899.

4 It is meant the unjustified criticism by Rosa Luxemburg of Marx's theory.

5 See V. I. Lenin. Complete Collected Works, vol. 23, pp. 7–9; vol. 24, p. 213; vol. 48, pp. 69, 92–93, 121, 149.

6 It is meant the book by F. A. Rothstein, which R. Luxemburg cites: Th. Rothstein. "Egypt's Ruin". London, 1910. V. I. Lenin's notes on R. Luxemburg's book make clear the meaning of this point in the plan (see Lenin Miscellany XXII, pp. 389–390).

TABLES ILLUSTRATING THE CHANGE 
IN THE STRUCTURE OF THE AGGREGATE SOCIAL PRODUCT 
ACCORDING TO SOCIO-ECONOMIC FORMATIONS1

[Table I]2

| | Means of Production a | Means of Consumption b for workers; 1,000,000 people | | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000 years of slavery and serfdom | 100% (1/20) | 100% (1/20) | 2 A | 2 A |
| 200 years of capitalism | 1000% (5) | 100% (1/2) | 1000 A | 100 A |
| 100 years of socialism | 2000% (20) | 2000% (20) (1000%) | 2000 A | 1000 A c |

a — means of production.
b — means of consumption.
c Original variant: 2000 A.

[Table II]3

| | c | v | m | Capitalism realized part of m | c : v | [c : v]d |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000 [years of slavery and serfdom] | 100 A + | 100 A + | 100 A | 50 A | 1 : 1 | 100 A; 100 A |
| 200 [years of capitalism] | 1000 A + | 200 A + | 300 A | 100 A | 5 : 1 | 1000 A; 200 A |
| 100 [years of socialism] | 10000 A + | 1500 A + | 3000 A | 2500 A | 6⅔ : 1 | 10000 A; 1500 A |

[Page of manuscript with analysis of the diagram of expanded reproduction. 1913]

[Table III]4

| | c | v | m | Accumulated part of Mehrwert a | c : v | Share of workers in Wertprodukt b | [Relative growth of total social product] |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| [2000 years of slavery and serfdom] | 2 A + | 2 A + | 2 A = 6 A | 1 A | 1 : 1 | 50% | |
| [200 years of capitalism] | 100 A + | 10 A + | 20 A = 130 A | 10 A | 10 : 1 | 33% | |
| [100 years of socialism] | 10000 A + | +[1500 A] + [1000 A] = 11500 A | 200 A | 20 : 1 | 67% | 1750; 83g |
| [Growth under socialism compared to capitalism] | 1 : 100 | 1 : 130 | 1 : 100 Δ | | | |
| [Growth under capitalism compared to pre-capitalist social orders] | 1 : 50 | 1 : 5 | 1 : 10 | | | |

a — of surplus value.
b — of newly produced value.
c In the original an inaccuracy as a result of a computational error. Should be: 1917.
d In the original an inaccuracy as a consequence of the previous error. Should be: 91.
e In the original, apparently a lapsus calami. Should be: 1 : 50.

[1900 – MARCH 1917]

[Table IV]

| | "Constant capital" | "Variable capital" | "Surplus value" | Entire aggregate social product | Accumulated part of m | Consumption of workers | Share of workers in Wertprodukt (in new value) | Consumption of exploiters | All personal consumption generally b |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000 years of slavery and serfdom | 2 A + | 2 A + | 2 A = 6 A | | 1/2 A e | 2 A | 1 : 1 | 1½ A l | 3.5 [A]p |
| 200 years of capitalism | 100 A + | 10 A + | 20 A = 130 A | + 700 A a from m = 1200 A b | 10 A | 10 A | 10 : 1 | 10 A | 21 [A] |
| 100 years of socialism | 10000 A + | 1500 A + | 1000 A = 11500 A | | 300 A d | 1200 A k | 20 : 1 | — | 1025 [A] c |
| Growth under socialism compared to capitalism | | 1 : 50 r | 1 : 88 | 1 : 50 | 1 : 120 h | | | |
| Growth under capitalism compared to pre-capitalist social orders | 1 : 50 | 1 : 5 | 1 : 10 | 1 : 22 j | | | |

a Original variant: 500 A.
b Original variant: 1000 A.
c Original variant: 1 : 100.
d Original variant: 1 A.
e Original variant: 500 A.
f Original variant: 1 : 50.
g Original variant: 1 : 10.
h Original variant: 1000 A.
i Original variant: 1 : 100.
k This figure corresponds to the original variant. In the final variant should be: 80%.
l Original variant: 1 A.
m This figure corresponds to the original variant. In the final variant should be: 3½ A.
n Original variant: 1000 A.
o Original variant: 1 : 50. This figure corresponds to the original variant. In the final variant should be: 1 : 6.
p This figure corresponds to the original variant. In the final variant should be: 4 A.
q This figure corresponds to the original variant. In the final variant should be: 1214 A.
r This figure corresponds to the original variant (1025 : 21 ≈ 49). In the final variant should be: 1 : 58.
s In the original this ratio was not calculated. Should be: 1 : 60.
t 1 : 50.
u 1 : 7.
v Incorrect, since the accumulated part of m is also in part personal consumption.
[1 : 5]

The tables presented below represent four stages of V. I. Lenin's work; the first three of them are draft in character (they are located on a page with the outline of a plan of articles for the thirtieth anniversary of K. Marx's death, see pp. 79–80). Judging by their placement in the manuscript, they were drawn up after February 21, in late February – March 1913. They are reproduced in chronological sequence; the draft variants (Tables I – III) are formatted taking into account the arrangement of material in the fair copy (Table IV); all editorial additions are given in square brackets.

The occasion for developing these tables was the pages of Chapter XXIII of R. Luxemburg's book (pp. 287–294), where an unjustified critique is directed against V. I. Lenin's work "On the Characterization of Economic Romanticism" and which contains, in particular, the following statements that attracted V. I. Lenin's attention: "The growth of constant capital at the expense of variable capital is merely the capitalist expression of the general effects of the rising productivity of labor. The formula c > v, when translated from the capitalist language into the language of the general process of labor, means nothing more than the following: the higher the productivity of human labor, the shorter the period of time during which a given quantity of means of production is transformed into a finished product. This is a universal law of human labor; it holds under all pre-capitalist forms of production and will hold in the future under the socialist social order. Expressed in the material use-value form of the aggregate social product, this law must manifest itself in an ever-increasing application of aggregate social labor-time to the production of means of production as compared with the production of means of consumption. In a socialist-organized and consciously planned social economy, this process would advance even faster than in present-day capitalist society" (pp. 291–292). "...The production of means of production in socialist society — taking labor-time as the unit of measurement — must grow compared with the production of means of consumption incomparably faster than at present" (p. 294).

Regarding these arguments, V. I. Lenin makes the following remarks: "291–2. What nonsense!!" "292: allgemeines Gesetz [universal law] under all social formations." "292 greater application of l a b o r t i m e to Produktionsmittel [means of production] than to Konsumtionsmittel [means of consumption] (a muddle)." "294: Under socialism Produktionsmittel : Konsumtionsmittel grow even faster (muss [must])" (see Lenin Miscellany XXII, pp. 361–365).

These critical remarks determined the character of Lenin's table construction. At the center of V. I. Lenin's attention is the change across formations (slavery and serfdom as pre-capitalist forms of production, capitalism, socialism as a future social order — clearly referring to communist society as a whole, not merely its first phase) in the structure of the aggregate social product, the relation of the production of means of production and the production of articles of consumption, the growth of the consumption of the working class. In the course of developing the tables, V. I. Lenin changed the numerical data several times, striving for the most successful variant.

In all four tables, the letter "A" (from the German "Arbeit," "Arbeitszeit" or "Arbeitseinheit") designates a certain unit of labor-time (for example, 1 million worker-hours). Cf. in R. Luxemburg's book p. 294, Lenin Miscellany XXII, p. 364. In the selection of examples, the polemical direction of these materials against R. Luxemburg's erroneous assertions is evident.

Table I illustrates the relation of the growth of production of means of production to the growth of production of articles of consumption. If we take the growth of production of means of production over 2000 years of the existence of slavery and serfdom as 100% (growth from 0 to 100), then over 200 years of capitalism, according to the table, this division of production increases by 1000% (i.e., by another factor of 10), and after 100 years of the existence of socialism it can increase by 2000% (i.e., by another factor of 20), and so on.

The figures in parentheses express, with some approximation (if one does not compute compound interest), the annual percentage rate of growth of production (for example, 100% : 2000 years = 1/20 % per year, etc.).

The double figure in the rubric "Means of consumption of workers" under socialism — 2000% (1000%) — means the following: the growth, so to speak, of the "value of labor-power" (the "variable capital" under capitalism) in itself will constitute 1000%, but all consumption of the working class, taking into account the elimination of the consumption of exploiters, will increase by 2000% (cf. Table IV, where this is shown clearly).

On the right in a box is shown the relation of the same two divisions of production, but not in percentages but in certain absolute quantities, in units of labor-time expended on the production of means of production (left column) and articles of consumption (right column); in the first row the figures have changed compared to the left table. The entire calculation is conducted with respect to a definite quantity of people (working people or population) — "1,000,000 people" — which is equivalent to abstracting from population growth.

3 The last column of this table expresses the relation c : v in absolute quantities.

4 In the column "Share of workers in Wertprodukt" is calculated the ratio v/(v + m).

Wertprodukt — newly produced value (a term which Marx uses in *Capital*). Unlike the value of constant capital c, which merely transfers itself unchanged onto the produced product, newly produced value (in Table IV V. I. Lenin calls it "new value") consists of the value of variable capital v and surplus value m, i.e., equals v + m.

The consumption of workers under capitalism and in pre-capitalist societies is simply v. Under socialism, where the consumption of exploiters is abolished, V. I. Lenin includes in workers' consumption also a part of m.

In the double final rubric (editorial heading "Relative growth of total social product") is shown the growth of production under capitalism and socialism relative to pre-capitalist social orders (if the level achieved before capitalism is taken as 1) and the growth of production under socialism compared to capitalism (if the level achieved under capitalism is taken as 1).

5 A number of changes in the numerical data of this table arose for two reasons. First, because initially V. I. Lenin added to workers' consumption under socialism 500 A from the surplus product ("surplus-value") of 1000 A, so that all workers' consumption constituted 500 A + 500 A = 1000 A; in the final variant, however, he assigned 700 A out of 1000 A to workers' consumption, so that all their consumption reached 500 A + 700 A = 1200 A. From this resulted corresponding changes in other rubrics. Second, the accumulated part of the surplus product in pre-capitalist societies was initially determined as 1 A; in the final variant, however, V. I. Lenin reduced it to ½ A.

By placing in quotation marks the names of the rubrics "Constant capital," "Variable capital," "Surplus-value" (i.e., "surplus value"), V. I. Lenin evidently marks the conditional, figurative character of these categories of capitalism when applied to pre-capitalist forms of production and to socialist production.

6 At first in this rubric (main, left column) V. I. Lenin simply summed the data figuring in the rubrics "Consumption of workers" and "Consumption of exploiters." But then, apparently, he decided that such a calculation was insufficient, since the accumulated part of surplus value m, which goes to the expansion of production, again divides into constant capital c and variable capital v, and the latter is included in workers' consumption. Assuming the organic composition of capital, i.e., the ratio c : v, to remain constant, V. I. Lenin calculates the increase in the total amount of personal consumption and records the result obtained in this way in an additional, right column of this rubric. For example: under capitalism "all personal consumption" in general consists of "consumption of workers" (10 A) and "consumption of exploiters" (10 A) and amounts to 20 A; but the "accumulated part" of m (10 A) goes to the expansion of production and, with the same organic composition of capital (c : v in this case equals 100 A : 10 A = 10 : 1), is divided in the ratio 10 : 1 into constant and variable capital; consequently, 1/11 of 10 A, i.e., approximately 1 A, also goes to personal consumption; in that case "all personal consumption" in general will amount to 20 A + 1 A = 21 A; this quantity V. I. Lenin records in the additional right column of this rubric. Such is the course of reasoning that gave rise to V. I. Lenin's note at the bottom of this rubric and to the additional right column of the rubric. However, later, apparently taking into account the fact that the division of the accumulated part into c + v occurs in the following production cycle (year), as well as other circumstances complicating the calculation of the desired quantity, V. I. Lenin crossed out this rubric with a pencil.

26201

LETTER TO ATTORNEY A. KAN1

Krakow, April 3 [1913]

Dear Sir!

I thank you for your telegraphic reply "Letter detained." A new attempt at mediation compels me for the present to apply against my opponent all "methods of struggle." Therefore I request that you undertake no official steps until my notification.

I hope to receive in the near future important documents, which I shall deliver to you. These, in my opinion, will be able to change your opinion regarding the "somewhat uncertain 'legal position'" 

N...